January 9, 2011 Subject:
It is only a training film for the GI's on how women pick up & two time GI's in bars & clubs.
How it came into the lime light is that when the War Department/Department of Defence declass the training films, news reels and so fourth from WWI to Vietnam was throwen in the trash.
I guy recovered them, produced a web site and made them available to the public. This and other films was not for public viewing while classified as sensitive material. I use to have his web site but lost it.
In todays time & laws this film could be considered as child porn by some
December 3, 2010 Subject:
What a great film.
August 7, 2010 Subject:
I personally think someone didn't want to see film go to waste that was approaching expiration. It couldn't have involved much thought beyond that.
March 9, 2010 Subject:
All You Blue Noses (And Another Color, I Won't Mention..!)...Need To Book Passage On The Next Mayflower And Go Back To England...They Love Repression There..!..Tea Party Morons..!..It's Just A Short..!..And Not A Very Good One At That.
February 9, 2009 Subject:
DISTURBING? SOME PEOPLE ARE PLAIN DISTURBED...
and sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. This is an amazingly cute clip of shirley temple and the other child actors. It's meant to be funny. Lighten up.
March 25, 2006 Subject:
a few facts, people
Some grasp on history these reviewers have got.
First of all, Grahame Greene and the publication "Night And Day" (which he co-edited) lost the lawsuit, and the magazine folded as a result of the damages awarded.
As to calling the Great Depression "FDR's Depression," that is purely ridiculous.
When Roosevelt was inaugurated in March 1933, the U.S. was at the nadir of the Depression. A fourth of the workforce was unemployed. Industrial production had fallen by more than half since 1929. Two million people were homeless. The banking system had been teetering on the brink of collapse since 1929.
It's hardly "his" Depression, and the reforms and social programs he brought about relieved a crisis situation that otherwise would likely have led to either communist revolution or the fascist bootheel.
December 29, 2005 Subject:
I question the symbolism of the diaper pin.
August 9, 2005 Subject:
Sex,War And FDR!
Of course they're only little kids playing adults & it's supposed to be funny & make a lot of money,too. But FDR, our big-mouthed Commander-In-Chief of EVERYTHING and wannabe Prez-4-Life, just HAD to stick his Big Nose into Kid Sex,too. Pulling the strings of his puppet Will Hays, the Code Boards (read: Cent.Comitee of the Commy Party USA) began to deny more & more 'seals' to sexy pix like this. Ugly George notes incredulously that a little flat-chested 4-year old chick (Shoily Temple) was the subject of many Code Board local meetings & debates about her 'femme fatale' roles,as one reviewer notes..as millions starved in FDR's Great Depression...
July 12, 2005 Subject:
Seems pretty tame to me
In the sexphobic atmosphere of 21st Century America, especially in regard to "eroticised" childhood (of which there seems to be quite a hysteria going on, and has been since the 80s), I can certainly understand why these little movies make some individuals uncomfortable - but I don't share this mindset.
My only genuine qualm with this short is the fact that the jokes are forced and mostly unfunny and annoying. I laughed once, I'll admit - when the boy offers Shirley an all-day sucker as incentive while he asks her to choose between him and a rival boy who is simultaneously vying for her affections.
It's also a great put-off that these children are made to act like adults; it strikes me as unnatural. Children are more interesting being children, which is why I am a lifelong fan of the Little Rascals. Hal Roach knew what he was doing and pumped out consistently priceless and timeless entertainment. The guys responsible for Baby Burlesks weren't so skilled in that department.
I give this short two stars in the name of historical curiosity - and the kids ARE cute, if sometimes a little annoying!
June 18, 2005 Subject:
The defence Greene never used
This is not a good film, but it is an important one.
In 1938 Grahame Greene and his publisher were sued for libel by Shirley Temple and 20th Century Fox because in a review of "Wee Willie Winkie" in the "Night and Day" magazine Greene had suggested that Temple's act was deliberately designed to exploit the sexual fantasies of elderly clergymen. The defendants admitted guilt and the case was settled out of court, the imputation being described as "an outrage" by the prosecuting counsel and the judge. Perhaps Greene should have added lawyers to the professions with an unhealthy view of the dimpled darling.
Why Greene and his publisher caved in is a mystery. One has only to read a list of Temple's roles in the "Baby Burlesks" to see the justification for Greene's comment. In 1932 she was cast as "Charmaine" in "War Babies", "Morelegs Sweettrick" in "Kid in Hollywood," "Madame Cradlebait"in "Kid in Africa," and "La Belle Diaperina"in "Glad Rags to Riches." Few people today would deny that these films are exploitative, demeaning, and prurient.
It is important to remember that such films were made and widely accepted. It is not recorded that any cinemas refused to show them, but news vendors did refuse to sell the magazine in which Greene voiced his disquiet.
As ever, the archive performs a valuable service in making this film available, and I hope other "Baby Burlesks" are to follow. You have to see them to believe them.